(18-12-2012 02:58 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote: Violent Crime rates and murder rates from 1960 to 2010. What was this about there not being an appreciable impact by gun legislation in the '90s?

During the period of the assault weapons ban from 1994 to 2004, both violent crime and murder rates dropped (after leveling off the last 4 years from 2000 to 2004, coincident with Bush's presidency). The violent crime rate dropped by 25 points while the murder rate dropped by 0.3 points.

The point is this, crime rates are at an all time low for the last 30 years, as are murder rates. These are trends towards significant decreases from all-time highs in the mid-early 90's.

I am not saying gun legislation is the only cause, but it surely had an impact. Perhaps the decreases in the mid-late 70's are also correlated with the Vietnam War and its resulting impact back home? The War on Drugs might be in here somewhere too with rates increasing dramatically in the mid 80's into the 90's?

Not simple, but arguing that legislation has done nothing is fruitless.

The assault weapons ban ended 8 years ago. Crime rate still falling. That law was ineffective.

One more time, I am not saying the assault weapons ban was the only factor. Post-war peace seems to be recurrent too, and that would currently qualify.

Rates were constant throughout Bush's presidency and started to decrease again during Obama's.

There are other factors, I am well aware. But one cannot argue that the law was ineffective from the numbers or the rates. The trend is coincident with it having had a positive impact, not a negative impact and not a neutral impact.

Sweet, one person stopped one other person! And they were an off-duty police officer. And hey look! Other security guards have done similar. The one or two instances where one guy with a gun kills another guy with a gun. Good thing they had them since police don't...

The fact that these people did this in the first place is the issue, and I do not want to live in a society that polices itself when I know how a lot of them think (almost half believe in a 6,000 Earth. I don't want that person making decisions about my safety).

But by all means, ignore EVERY argument that contradicts your notion that we are safer with a gun-toting society. Ignoring the facts and sitting in a corner humming to yourself whenever someone disagrees with you is what the fundamentalists in this country do too.

(18-12-2012 03:23 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote: But by all means, ignore EVERY argument that contradicts your notion that we are safer with a gun-toting society. Ignoring the facts and sitting in a corner humming to yourself whenever someone disagrees with you is what the fundamentalists in this country do too.

(18-12-2012 03:27 PM)Phaedrus Wrote: What, I disagree with you and you make up every possible fallacy you can throw at me, then come back with a dozen ad hominems whenever you feel like?

Go fuck yourself with a cactus, hypocrite.

Please keep the discussions clear of personal attacks, both of you. You're mature enough to avoid this kind of behavior.

(18-12-2012 03:27 PM)Phaedrus Wrote: What, I disagree with you and you make up every possible fallacy you can throw at me, then come back with a dozen ad hominems whenever you feel like?

Go fuck yourself with a cactus, hypocrite.

I was talking to BlackKnight actually in my last couple of posts.

You just seem to be on the special pleading side of the fallacy line by looking at the numbers and only being able to find ways to argue out of it. Ignoring everything else.

Such malice and animosity. You don't like someone else's opinion and you tell them to go fuck themselves. How can any reasoned and rationed discussion ever occur with such attitudes? It is as if I am explaining radiometric dating to a YEC.